DS Forums

 
 

Lidl to create 5000 jobs despite Brexit


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 18-12-2016, 17:45
MTUK1
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
Which bit of "We are leaving the EU" do you find difficult to understand? what is Mrs May's alternative, stay in the EU, don't think so...
This guy is a WUM.
MTUK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
Old 18-12-2016, 17:45
MTUK1
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
Indeed. Let's not worry about all of the high skill high pay jobs which are being lost because they can all become shelf-stackers in a discount supermarket.
Which high skilled jobs have been lost due to Brexit?
MTUK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 17:57
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,035
No its English. The word "usually" means commonly, customarily, ordinarily, as a rule. My saying almost all food is VAT free is not a contradicted by you quoting something that states food is usually VAT free.
your posts are still nonsense even though they are typed in english. perhaps you should look up the meaning of the word. you obviously don't understand the rest of what you are talking about, but you may understand that

even if almost all food is VAT free, supermarkets sell millions of pounds of goods per year that are VATable, such as alcohol and non food items




My original point was that almost all food is VAT free, and that money saved from buying cheaper food is likely to spent on things that have VAT.
i could see that's what you are trying to say, however you have absolutely no proof to back up the part in bold do you? it could be spent in the same store on more non VATable items or a multitude of other things





Its not like consumers particularly consumers with low incomes who are the stereotypical Lidl shoppers are likely to put the money into a savings account.
doing calculations based on steretypes rather than facts will usually result in innaccurate results





I take it you are incapable of understanding that if shop A gets 90% of its food from UK farming and shop B gets 50% of its food from UK farming. Then shop A sources more of its food from UK farming than shop B which was the point I made.
that's not true at all. you really don't have a clue what you are talking about

one stores 50% could be considerably more in value than another stores 90%

take into consideration that tesco have over 3 times the store lidl has, then even if tesco sources a smaller percentage of goods from the UK than lidl, the overall result can still be that tesco sources MORE goods from the UK

do you understand that now? it's incredible simple

the reason you post so much nonsense is because you don't fully think about what you are posting before you post it



And if shop B loses customers to shop A its going to increase the amount of food bought from UK farming, which was the other point.
no. that's more nonsense


The point of the NFU providing the information I used is to enable consumers to choose where they want to shop based on which supermarkets source most from the UK.
and not to provide answers to the questions i asked, which is why your answers are nonsense



You appear to not understand the meaning of "If you think" "you are living in denial"
clearly there are many thinks that appear to you to be something other than what they are, based on the nonsense you have posted so far



When talking about supermarket workers pay using store assistant pay is perfectly sensible as most supermarket workers are store assistance. They are the most numerous the typical supermarket worker.
i presume now it's finally sunk in that you know you were wrong because you were over generalising



You have failed to understand the following words from my previous posts. I have placed in Bold below.
wrong again. you are jumping to incorrect conclusions




"Lidl source their products primarily from UK farming so more money to UK farming."
"More than the likes of Tesco, Sainsburys, etc. The cheaper supermarkets Lidl and Aldi source more of their produce from UK farming than the more expensive supermarkets."
but you can't provide any facts and figures to back this up. you've shown percentages, but not actual values from each company to demonstrate how much each actually spends. i think as tesco are the much bigger business in the uk, it would be safe to presume they spend the most, however rather than making assumptions i'd rather see facts. you claim lidl sources more, but can you prove it with facts and values in regards to actual money spent, as opposed to percentages of goods the stores buy - which is obviously flawed logic?



"Lidl pays its workers more, sources more of its food from UK farms and sells food cheaper than Tesco."
that's just generalising again. prove it. you can't, can you?


As far as tax to HMRC the comparison was between a lower paid worker and a higher paid worker. Tesco by the way while no doubt paying more tax due to being far larger do engage in lots of tax avoidance measures through offshore trusts and offshore companies.
so whilst you've concluded that with the tax element, how are you unable to draw similar conclusions in regards to spend on uk sourced goods?



Answered above. Store assistances are the most numerous supermarket employees. Also for other members of staff I would assume there are pay differentials so a higher wage for store assistant is likely to mean higher pay for people directly above them.
so basically you have absolutely no idea whatsoever, and that's why you were generalising, because you have no facts and figures?



You think retail-week.com are lying?
no. i'm pointing out you haven't proven what was asked of you. see further up for more details



What I posted was a truism.
What do you think defines retail staff productive if not £ of sales per retail worker?
The purpose of retail is to sell stuff.
so basically you can't prove it? because you would have if you could, would you not?


In what way are Tesco store assistance terms and conditions of employment better than LIdl store assistances?
tell me. i bet this is another thing you know nothing about and can't answer


As far as pay its not a little bit more its just over a £1 an hour more. The reason for the difference is LIdl is committed to paying the living wage.
and more generalising





And everyone starves to death because no one is selling any food.
you really have a bizarre understanding of the world




Your not looking at the bigger picture
wrong again. it's because i am looking at the bigger picture and you are not, that it's so easy to show how wrong you are so frequently



you are being ridiculous.
i'm not. it's just you really don't understand what you are talking about, it may seem that way to you




1. People need to buy food its a necessity the idea that all the shops selling food will go bust is ridiculous.
as you are the first person to bring this up, obviously it's an idea of yours




2. Aldi make a profit they are not operating at a loss to undercut competitors.
once they undertake the planned expansion for a period at least, they may not make an overall profit. possibly never again if it doesn't work out well for them



The customers save more than a few pennies or pounds.
so apart from saving money, what else are they saving?

this is just more generalising, so ultimately the next thing you are going to saw is likely to be more nonsense


That you think for some bizarre unknown reason that people shopping at Lidl rather than Tesco will:

Cause HMRC to lose money despite almost all food being VAT free and despite Lidl paying its workers more money, and Lidl making a profit and paying tax.
the part in bold is false as i've pointed out before. also as i've pointed out before, stores VATable items including both food and non food items, such as alcohol, clothing, electric goods etc. have you evern actually been in a supermarket?







Cause more benefits to be paid out despite Lidl paying its store assistances higher wages than Tesco, and expanding creating more jobs, and despite the UK having very low unemployment that is falling, and increasing numbers of job vacancies and increasing wages.
if lidl causes other businesses to close then it may result in more benefits having to be paid out. not everyone who loses a job will get a new one in lidl


Cause higher inflation despite Lidl selling food cheaper than Tesco
when you take things out of context it may appear unusual. see what i said previously on the subject of inflation


Cause etc, etc, etc, loss of their own jobs despite most Lidl customers not working for rival supermarket chains and if they did the fact they get a discount at the rival supermarket chain at which they work so would probably shop there.

Does not make me think I am wrong it makes me think you are deluded.
that last part make no sense, so is therefore nonsense. it's no surprise someone with such a bizarre understanding of the world would consider other people deluded instead of realising they were the deluded ones



Lidl must think expanding is good or they would not be doing it. Unless for some bizarre unknown reason you think Lidl management are trying to harm the company.
clearly you don't understand the difference between thinking something may be good, and something resulting in being good

the expansion has risks, which means it may not end up being good for the business



If I worked in say Tesco as a store assistant and Lidl opened a store nearby I would apply for a store assistant or better job at Lidl as they pay more than Tesco.
what about the other 60 odd million people in the UK? what would they do?

part of your problem is you don't consider the big picture and people who think and do things differently from you. that's what you are so frequently wrong


If I worked at Tesco and chose to stay at Tesco then lost my job I would hopefully get redundancy pay and would look for another job. With UK unemployment very low and falling in most areas of the UK getting another job should not be a huge problem.
yet another ill thought idea. if you lost your job at tesco because the store closed down, you would be competiting in the same employment market as the other staff who lost their jobs. on the other hand if you were the only one to lose your job, other employers may think twice about employing you if you weren't worth retaining at tesco



Do you define what is good as what is good for say Tesco not what is good for the general public, consumers and as Lidl pays more good for workers.
no, i leave definitions to people who put together dictionaries. what is "good" for one may not be good for another, so it's usually a matter of opinion depending on someones point of view


Ideally capitalism means competition to supply goods to customers with the supplier providing the customers with best value for money winning.
again not true. see companies like apple, nike, mercedese, etc and compare them to competitors who offere cheaper and arguably more value for money items that don't have anywhere near the same marketshare





Are you opposed to consumers benefiting from capitalism? Would you prefer monopolies and cartels and barriers to other business entering and competing?
where is this nonsense coming from? is this because you can't present facts to back up what you are saying, that instead you prefer to just waffle on nonsense instead in the hope someone will just ignore you and give up?
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 17:59
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,035
Having read through this thread you seem to have no idea about food retail. You attack a good news post on investment in the UK to create 5000 jobs saying it will reduce taxes and create low wages and when challenged you change tactics and go on about quality and twist everything into something anti Brexit. Strange then that their pizza won a quality award.

http://www.lidl.co.uk/en/18016.htm
i have not said that at all. and whether it's good news or not is simply a matter of opinion. i doubt competitors will consider it good news, do you?
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:01
TelevisionUser
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Storbritannia
Posts: 28,930
Utterly hilarious and contradictory. Two companies go into admin. They blame Brexit. Companies issue profit warnings. Oh it's Brexit. Economy in downturn which is isn't. Oh it's Brexit. This is the same old remain BS.
^ Prime example of explicit Leave denial. You do not know better than the company chief executives and chairmen and chairwomen who are having to deal with the Brexit fallout and who are having to now lay off workers.

What other groundless denials are you going to come up with? The Apollo 11 landing was a hoax? The Earth is flat?

Again you cannot have any credibility in this or any other forum if you do not accept that there has been negative Brexit consequences for companies trading in the UK whether that's in terms of financial or job losses.
TelevisionUser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:05
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,035
Which bit of "We are leaving the EU" do you find difficult to understand? what is Mrs May's alternative, stay in the EU, don't think so...
do you have absolutely no idea about politics at all?

surely even someone with a very limited knowledge of politics, even someone who doesn't understand politics will tell you how much politicians lie and say stuff that never actually happens

just because a politician says something, does not mean it will happen

all you have to do is google to find umpteen things tory politicians have said under the current reign which have not turned true. including things thereasa may the current PM (for how much longer?) has said

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...n-told-6211553

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/ar...ITTLEWOOD.html


just type in the name of any well known politician into google and add the word "lies" for more examples

regardless of what anyone says, there is absolutely no guarantee the UK will leave the EU, even if that is the current plan by the government
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:09
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,035
Not an answer. Still snobby.
it's an answer. that's your opinion, not a fact. you appear to lack the ability to answer with facts. just look at your next few posts quoted below

please explain why you believe this nonsense. Were you asleep during the referendum? Or are you deluded. Even the most hardcore remoaners don't talk such nonsense.
it's not nonsense at all. there is no guarantee at all, as if there was you could prove it. but you can't as you are wrong

Still biased. Still a snob.
no facts from you, just a personal insult instead

Care to explain your wacky unjustifiable view?
again no facts, just insults

Ok, thanks Cough.
and another unnecesary post, with no facts

it's clear you lack facts to back up your point of view on the matter so have to result in making pointless answers instead
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:11
MTUK1
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
^ Prime example of explicit Leave denial. You do not know better than the company chief executives and chairmen and chairwomen who are having to deal with the Brexit fallout and who are having to now lay off workers.

What other groundless denials are you going to come up with? The Apollo 11 landing was a hoax? The Earth is flat?

Again you cannot have any credibility in this or any other forum if you do not accept that there has been negative Brexit consequences for companies trading in the UK whether that's in terms of financial or job losses.
Your facts aren't backed up be figures. If there were massive job losses, where are they? Why aren't they being announced in the unemployment figures. Why is growth ok? Nothing amazing, but not the disaster you remoaners try and make out. Same old remoaner bs.
MTUK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:12
MTUK1
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
it's an answer. that's your opinion, not a fact. you appear to lack the ability to answer with facts. just look at your next few posts quoted below



it's not nonsense at all. there is no guarantee at all, as if there was you could prove it. but you can't as you are wrong



no facts from you, just a personal insult instead



again no facts, just insults



and another unnecesary post, with no facts

it's clear you lack facts to back up your point of view on the matter so have to result in making pointless answers instead
Remember your capital letters and full stops for future posts please. As I said, even the most hardcore remoaners accept we're going. For some strange reason, you can't. I am now sticking your deluded self on ignore. Bye.
MTUK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:15
allaorta
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 18,881
Lidl to create 5000 jobs despite Brexit

This is the same old Leave BS - a very highly selective quote while completely, and conveniently, ignoring the bigger picture of the wider economic damage being done by Brexit.

Ford confirmed extra Brexit costs of $200 million (estimated $600 million for 2017) and the list of Brexit casualties goes on.Seagate's now pulling out of the UK, Rivington Biscuits has gone into administration, Hewden machinery rental went into administration, Mitie's issued a profits warning, British Land made losses,

Memo to all Brexit propagandists - you all have zero credibility because you refuse to accept or acknowledge the negative economic consequences of the way that you have voted even when the firms concerned explicitly cited Brexit as the direct cause of financial losses, job losses, going into administration and so forth.
Indeed. Let's not worry about all of the high skill high pay jobs which are being lost because they can all become shelf-stackers in a discount supermarket.
Pity you didn't notice that three of those companies have a direct link to a construction industry which has been in the doldrums since well before the referendum. Or that Rivingtons have been on the brink of disaster for years and that Ford have been losing market for a considerable time. Seagate has something of a history of operation movement when it suits them.
allaorta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:22
MTUK1
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
Pity you didn't notice that three of those companies have a direct link to a construction industry which has been in the doldrums since well before the referendum. Or that Rivingtons have been on the brink of disaster for years and that Ford have been losing market for a considerable time. Seagate has something of a history of operation movement when it suits them.
Wasn't Ford the company that got paid money by the EU to transfer some EU operations to that non European country of Turkey?
MTUK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:28
allaorta
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 18,881
Wasn't Ford the company that got paid money by the EU to transfer some EU operations to that non European country of Turkey?
I don't think they were given money but were lent it on advantageous terms and no doubt the Turks also bent over backwards.
allaorta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:31
kidspud
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,501
Wasn't Ford the company that got paid money by the EU to transfer some EU operations to that non European country of Turkey?
Ford didn't get paid any money by the EU. Another nonsense comment.
kidspud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:33
Mark_Jones9
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 6,853
Lidl to create 5000 jobs despite Brexit

This is the same old Leave BS - a very highly selective quote while completely, and conveniently, ignoring the bigger picture of the wider economic damage being done by Brexit.

Seagate's now pulling out of the UK, Rivington Biscuits has gone into administration, Hewden machinery rental went into administration, Mitie's issued a profits warning, British Land made losses, Ford confirmed extra Brexit costs of $200 million (estimated $600 million for 2017) and the list of Brexit casualties goes on.

Memo to all Brexit propagandists - you all have zero credibility because you refuse to accept or acknowledge the negative economic consequences of the way that you have voted even when the firms concerned explicitly cited Brexit as the direct cause of financial losses, job losses, going into administration and so forth.
Seagate have not publicly stated Brexit as the reason, they gave other reasons. I assume you are still relying on a friend said a friend was told by someone as your evidence brexit is to blame.

Rivington Biscuits and Hewden machine rental both cited brexit as a reason. However both were making substantial losses long before the referendum.

Mitie listed brexit amongst a very long list of other non brexit reasons why it had done surprisingly badly.

British Land has made a small percentage loss on the asset value of its property portfolio but underlying profits are up, since the referendum its been doing better than last year making more and better deals letting property with 98% of its portfolio let. And its increased its dividend.

Ford is continuing its investment in the UK despite what it said before the referendum it now has no plans to leave. The fall in value of the £ has hit Ford's profits and Ford plans to increase prices in the UK but expect that to impact UK sales. Ford however has had bigger problems this year a massive car recall in the USA.
Mark_Jones9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:37
LostFool
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 59,745
Ford didn't get paid any money by the EU. Another nonsense comment.
Though we are yet to find out what the "deal" was between the UK government and Nissain.
LostFool is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:39
kidspud
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,501
Though we are yet to find out what the "deal" was between the UK government and Nissain.
That's true.
kidspud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:52
MTUK1
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
Though we are yet to find out what the "deal" was between the UK government and Nissain.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...m-loan-1415960

I couldn't see Kidspud's denial of the truth as he's on my ignore list, but as you quoted him, here is a link that proves they where given money.
MTUK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 18:57
kidspud
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,501
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...m-loan-1415960

I couldn't see Kidspud's denial of the truth as he's on my ignore list, but as you quoted him, here is a link that proves they where given money.
And as usual you can't even read a headline, let alone the detail.
kidspud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 20:44
MargMck
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 17,652
This guy is a WUM.
Undoubtedly.
MargMck is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 21:28
unique
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,035
Remember your capital letters and full stops for future posts please. As I said, even the most hardcore remoaners accept we're going. For some strange reason, you can't. I am now sticking your deluded self on ignore. Bye.
and yet another post without any facts, and hiding your head in the sand by putting me on ignore as you can't answer factually. if anyone is deluded it's you. fortunately if you aren't lying you won't answer back
unique is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 21:55
ShaunIOW
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Isle of Wight
Posts: 7,829
Ford didn't get paid any money by the EU. Another nonsense comment.
No? http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news...m-loan-1415960
ShaunIOW is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 22:00
MTUK1
Inactive Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 19,783
I already linked to that on the last few pages!

Edit actually at 6:52pm. The remoaners on here still can't accept it.
MTUK1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 22:05
kidspud
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 11,501
So I've now read the article twice. How much did ford get paid?
kidspud is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18-12-2016, 22:10
John146
Forum Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Lancashire
Posts: 8,267
So I've now read the article twice. How much did ford get paid?
Well the headline says 80 million, but wouldn't swear that's what Ford got
John146 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-12-2016, 09:31
Happ Hazzard
Forum Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Chesterfield, Derbyshire
Posts: 1,650
The government should not be giving money to companies who threaten to take jobs from the UK, that is tantamount to blackmail. If companies refuse to employ people in the UK, they should be banned from trading here. We need to start fighting back, Britain has been pushed around one time too many.
Happ Hazzard is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply




 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:38.